Weigen v. American Family Mutual Insurance Company SI, CV 18-470-TUC-JAS (JR). (2018)
Court: District Court, D. Arizona
Number: infdco20181203594
Visitors: 13
Filed: Nov. 30, 2018
Latest Update: Nov. 30, 2018
Summary: ORDER JAMES A. SOTO , District Judge . Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation issued by Magistrate Judge Rateau. In the Report and Recommendation, Magistrate Judge Rateau recommends denying Plaintiff's motion to remand. As the Court finds that the Report and Recommendation appropriately resolved the motion, Plaintiff's objection is denied. 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: (1) Magistrate Judge Rateau's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 18) is accepted and ado
Summary: ORDER JAMES A. SOTO , District Judge . Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation issued by Magistrate Judge Rateau. In the Report and Recommendation, Magistrate Judge Rateau recommends denying Plaintiff's motion to remand. As the Court finds that the Report and Recommendation appropriately resolved the motion, Plaintiff's objection is denied. 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: (1) Magistrate Judge Rateau's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 18) is accepted and adop..
More
ORDER
JAMES A. SOTO, District Judge.
Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation issued by Magistrate Judge Rateau. In the Report and Recommendation, Magistrate Judge Rateau recommends denying Plaintiff's motion to remand. As the Court finds that the Report and Recommendation appropriately resolved the motion, Plaintiff's objection is denied.1
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:
(1) Magistrate Judge Rateau's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 18) is accepted and adopted.
(2) Plaintiff's motion to remand (Doc. 6) is denied.
(3) This case is referred back to Magistrate Judge Rateau for further proceedings.
FootNotes
1. The Court reviews de novo the objected-to portions of the Report and Recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). The Court reviews for clear error the unobjected-to portions of the Report and Recommendation. See Johnson v. Zema Systems Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999); see also Conley v. Crabtree, 14 F.Supp.2d 1203, 1204 (D. Or. 1998).
Source: Leagle
